lain to me why this needs a delegation?
(on IRC, Martin clarified that his question was more generally about
delegations for tasks that do not strictly require a delegation)
I think that there are four reasons for that:
0) generally, assuming that people will magically show up and do the
work do
Hi,
On 05.05.2013 00:35, Moray Allan wrote:
> Please could you clarify what delegations are still in effect?
while we're at it, could someone enlighten and/or clarify what's the
matter with (S)RM delegations? Not to advertise we should be changing
anything on the status quo and eve
Hi,
On Sun May 05, 2013 at 04:09:19 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Additionally, I need to do the bits.d.o delegation, and check the status
> on a possible addition to policy editors.
Can you explain to me why this needs a delegation?
Cheers,
Martin
--
Martin Zobel-Helas Debian System Adm
On 04/05/13 at 23:35 +0100, Moray Allan wrote:
> Hi Lucas,
Hi Moray,
Thanks for raising this issue.
An up-to-date list of delegations (and delegates) is indeed something
very useful.
> Please could you clarify what delegations are still in effect?
>
> These delegations are list
Hi Lucas,
Please could you clarify what delegations are still in effect?
These delegations are listed on
http://www.debian.org/intro/organization :
FTP masters [17 October 2012]
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2012/10/msg4.html
Backports team [6 July 2011]
http
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:16:18PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Definitely, written delegations could be really useful to Debian to
> clarify prerogatives and responsabilities, and avoid
> misunderstandings.
Sorry, but this sounds like micro-managing delegates to me. If you
think sec
opers themselves – that is responsable for deciding
which package is in which section, if one came to Debian after the archive was
reorganised into pools? More painfully, we just had two GRs which originate in
a disagreement about what delegates are delegated to do. Definitely, written
delegations could
7 matches
Mail list logo
